Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit time that researchers/tourists are allowed to spend with habituated animals One controlled study in Indonesia found that reintroduced Sumatran orangutans that spent limited time with caretakers acted more similar to wild orangutans than orangutans that spend more time with caretakers, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that numbers of mountain gorillas increased by 168% over 41 years while being visited by researchers and visitors during a restricted amount of time, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1539https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1539Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:12:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the density of livestock on farmland near peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of limiting the density of livestock on farmland near peatlands. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1786https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1786Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:16:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the amount of stabilisation material used We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the amount of stabilisation material used on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effectsCollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2057https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2057Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:38:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the thickness of drill cuttings We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the thickness of drill cuttings on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2065https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2065Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:47:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number and/or extent of, or prohibit additional, renewable energy installations in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number and/or extent of, or prohibit additional, renewable energy installations in an area on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2078https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2078Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:46:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of fishing days We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number of fishing days on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2108https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2108Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:35:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of fishing vessels We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number of fishing vessels on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2109https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2109Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:36:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of traps per fishing vessels We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number of traps per fishing vessels on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2110https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2110Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:37:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the density of traps We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the density of traps on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2111https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2111Tue, 22 Oct 2019 09:38:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the maximum weight and/or size of bobbins on the footrope We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the maximum weight and/or size of bobbins on the footrope on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2130https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2130Tue, 22 Oct 2019 10:26:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the amount of storm wastewater overflow We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the amount of storm wastewater overflow on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2181https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2181Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:40:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of fishing vessels or fishing days in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number of fishing vessels or fishing days in an area on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2794https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2794Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:36:53 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the length of fishing gear in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the length of fishing gear in an area on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2795https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2795Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:37:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit size of trawl net openings We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the size of trawl net openings on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2804https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2804Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:14:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the amount of storm wastewater overflow We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the amount of storm wastewater overflow on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2868https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2868Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:28:18 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit or exclude off-road vehicle use Two studies evaluated the effects of limiting or excluding off-road vehicle use on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (1 studies): One replicated, site comparison study found that restricting access of off-road vehicles and sheep had mixed effects on lizard species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one randomized study) in the USA found that areas where off-road vehicles were completely excluded using fencing that also excluded livestock grazing had higher densities of Agassiz’s desert tortoises compared to areas with some restrictions or no restrictions. The other study found that restricting off-road vehicle and sheep access had mixed effects on lizard abundance. Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the USA found that in areas where off-road vehicles were completely excluded, death rates of Agassiz’s desert tortoises were lower than in areas with some restrictions or no restrictions. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3502https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3502Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:44:34 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit road construction in important habitats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting road construction in important habitats on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3506https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3506Tue, 07 Dec 2021 10:00:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit vessel numbers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting vessel numbers on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3529https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3529Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:37:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit or prohibit specific fishing methods One study evaluated the effects of limiting or prohibiting specific fishing methods on reptile populations. This study was in Brazil. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in Brazil found that in areas where a fishing agreement was implemented that involved limiting the use of gill nets along with a wider suit of measures had more river turtles than areas that did not implement the agreement. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3546https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3546Wed, 08 Dec 2021 09:26:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of fishing vessels or fishing days in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of limiting the number of fishing vessels or fishing days in an area. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3550https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3550Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:09:23 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the length of fishing gear or density of traps in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of limiting the length of fishing gear or density of traps in an area. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3551https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3551Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:11:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of fishing days One study examined the effects of limiting the number of fishing days on marine fish populations. The study was in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in the Mediterranean Sea reported that in the 10 years following a decrease in overall number of days fished by a bottom trawl fleet, there was a higher biomass of thornback and brown rays. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3804https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3804Thu, 26 May 2022 14:24:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of traps or pots per vessel We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number of traps or pots per vessel on marine fish populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3807https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3807Thu, 26 May 2022 14:42:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number or length of static fishing nets in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number or length of static fishing nets in an area on marine fish populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3808https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3808Thu, 26 May 2022 14:45:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of fishing permits/licences to limit vessel or fisher numbers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number of fishing licences or permits to limit vessel or fisher numbers on marine fish populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3817https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3817Fri, 27 May 2022 08:41:37 +0100
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust